https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1887091
--- Comment #8 from Erich Eickmeyer <er...@ericheickmeyer.com> --- (In reply to Andy Mender from comment #6) > Koji build from updated SRPM: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=53204423 > > > Looks like Expat, not MIT. They're two different licenses (ran into > > something like this in my Ubuntu packages where it was Expat but I said > > MIT). > > Interesting. According to Wikipedia, MIT and Expat are the same license, > though there seem to be some nuances: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_License > Expat is not mentioned on the MIT licensing Fedora wiki page: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:MIT > However, I compared the text of the "Expat License" from Wikipedia and the > so-called "Modern Style with sublicense" and they match: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:MIT#Modern_Style_with_sublicense > The same is true for the license header in > jack_mixer-release-13/nsmclient.py. That's the "Modern Style with > sublicense" MIT license. > > The weird thing is that licensecheck reports "Expat License" very often, but > I can't remember seeing it ever report "MIT License" instead. > > > # nsmclient.py is expat, everything else is GPLv2 > > License: GPLv2 and Expat > > Per above comments, it should still read "MIT" instead of "Expat". However, > if Expat really is a different license, this needs to go through Fedora > Legal, because it's not a recognized valid license. > > > Ran into this when I tried that: > > > > No matching package to install: 'python3dist(cairo)' > > No matching package to install: 'python3dist(gobject)' > > > > So, considering every other package I've done with python dependencies, > > this is the first time I've run into that requirement. Apparently it > > doesn't work. > > Could be something up with the GTK related Python packages then. > Standardized Python Requires and BuildRequires are covered here: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/ > #_requires_and_buildrequires_with_standardized_names Per Neal's comment, went with his suggestions (seems obvious, but not at the same time?). > > %install > > %make_install > > mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch} > > mv %{buildroot}%{_prefix}/lib/python%{python3_version}/site-packages/* > > %{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch} > > Just realized that the last line here is wrong, it should be: > > mv %{buildroot}%{python3_sitelib}/* %{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch} > > See the Python macros: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_macros > > I re-ran fedora-review just in case. The following issues are still there: > Issues: > ======= > - If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a > BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. > Note: No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/ Fixed > - Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) > Note: jack-mixer : /usr/lib64/python3.9/site-packages/jack_mixer_c.la > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- > guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries Reading that article I couldn't figure out how to deal with that. It's clearly building its own .la file. > From rpmlint: > jack-mixer.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/jack_mixer/nsmclient.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3 > > This file should either be made executable or the "#! /usr/bin/env python3" > shebang removed from it. Ok, fixed. added %py3_shebang_fix. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
